"we're not spending nearly enough time crediting the folks who turn all that visionary stuff into tangible reality: the chief operating officers, the midlevel managers, the staffers."
I loved this point of view. It was really refreshing to read precisely because of it's anti-establishment view.
For me, Lublin tapped into a truth about our collective cult of celebrity and obsession with individuality. More than ever, people want to be famous. And more than any point in history, the ordinary guy on the street has got a pretty good shot at it if he can think of something clever enough to promote about himself via a Blog/ You Tube/ Reality TV. Dare anyone mention "chick chick boom."
What Lublin gets to in her piece is the tension between prominence versus significance. Surely it's better to be doing something of significance than something merely because of prominence? Think about how many "famous" people you can name. Now what about the people who aren't famous but who do something of significance? I bet a different list comes to mind.
I also liked her view because it also tapped into the paradox of choice (the more we have, the less we're happy) and the transparency and accesibility afforded by social media and Web 2.0.
As Lublin said:
"We have too many wannabe leaders. This doesn't sound like a bad thing -- the next generation should have dreams and ambitions. But which ones? The drive to start, grow, be in charge of something -- anything! -- has spawned a generation of people hunched over laptops at Starbucks, yearning for that big idea that will make them the next Larry or Sergey. But not everyone can create the Google of the future, and many of those who don't will think they're failures. In fact, they're just chasing the wrong dream. I recently met someone who said, "I'm the guy who makes sure the bills are paid and the numbers make sense, and I like that. I've got no desire to be the CEO." The working world would be a happier place if more of us aspired to roles that were just right -- if we valued job fit and performance at every level and stopped overemphasizing the very top."
For the full read:
